I appreciate the thoughtfulness of your response there. I am in neither group involved in this dispute, and I mainly post on this topic out of a wish to help end the tensions between these two groups of people who identidy as women. The major critique of your post there is simply about being careful how the term “feminist” is used in the context of this dispute: the strain of feminism that rejects trans women in their assertion of womanhood is a small minority of the feminist movement overall. The vast majority of feminists, in my observation accept trans women as women and as partners in the struggle against their shared enemy, the patriarchy, and don’t see trans women, in their attempts to live their truth, as knowingly or intentionally disrespectful to cis-women, or as gender infiltrators on behalf of patriarchy. The exclusionary faction among cis-women have their lived experience and their sensisibility, and I’m not going to tell them what to feel and what not to feel…that’s not my place…it just strikes me that the exclusionary faction might want to consider dialog with trans-women(in my observation, trans women do not assert their identity out of hostility to cis womenhood or out of any conscious intent to disrespect cis-women, and from what I can see are largely mystified as to why a small subset of cis-women seem to see them as the enemy. And I’m pretty sure that, if asked, the prohibitive majority of trans women would be glad to play a major role in reproductive rights activism on behalf of cis-women as part of a social contract between trans and cis-women that led to acceptance and the end of hostilities. Both groups of women could work together to fight against sexual assault, as both groups are equally likely to be victims of sexual assault. There are really far more common grounds for joint struggle than there are hostility.